The Power of Citizen Journalism
Post News ($)»     Post Blog»     Upload Image»     Groups»     Events»     Alerts»     How do I ...»
Email Print Share

Email this article

Recipient email:
Your email:
optional
Message:
optional

article imageDigital Journal TV: Harvard's Advice to Bloggers on AP Copyright Fiasco

Posted Jun 19, 2008 by  David Silverberg in Internet | 9 comments | 884 views
Next in Internet
Related News
Advertising
Associated Press wants to force bloggers and citizen journalists to pay to quote parts of their articles. The blogosphere is fighting back. We speak to the Harvard Citizen Media Project to find out what bloggers should do to protect themselves legally.

Digital Journal -- It's the PR disaster Associated Press never wanted: After it served a news site with takedown notices for quoting AP articles, a slew of blogs have boycotted the newswire service. AP claims bloggers and online writers are violating copyright by quoting parts of their articles. Blogs defend their use of quotes under the fair use law. Who's right?

This new media controversy is on the minds of anyone who writes online news or follows their favourite blog. AP is hoping to persuade blogs to pay for quotes, while bloggers want to quote AP articles freely, saying the referrals only help promote AP articles. As citizen journalist Sue D. pointed out, some bloggers are even calculating how much AP owes them for quoting writers without credit.

Harvard's Citizen Media Law Project offers bloggers and citizen journalists some guidance through its legal guide, but aside from that document there is little help online writers can get.

There is good reason to be confused: The fair use law isn't black-and-white because it often depends on context and article length. So if AP wants to charge or threaten lawsuits on bloggers, what should those bloggers and citizen journalists do to protect themselves? Is it too risky to quote from AP, even if the reference is a couple lines?

To help online writers and the public understand this controversy, Digital Journal TV investigates how AP managed to instigate the blogosphere into a massive boycott, why the new pricing plan is unreasonable and what bloggers can do to protect themselves.
article:256296:28::0
6 subscribers
Subscribe To This Thread[?] :
  • avatar Posted Jun 19, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #1
    Well done, David! Very pertinent to all of us!
  • avatar Posted Jun 19, 2008 by  Susan Duclos
    #2
    Great video David, thanks.

    One last note...if people were to sign the agreement to pay the 2.50 per word, they also would be signing their right to criticize the AP away.

    As per the terms of that agreement it says:

    You shall not use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to the author, the publication from which the Content came, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or depicted in the Content. You agree not to use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to or damaging to the reputation of Publisher, its licensors, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or referenced in the Content.


    So if the AP misrepresented, or was caught reporting false information, signing this would basically say you cannot show that portion to use to prove that point.

    Great piece!
  • avatar Posted Jun 19, 2008 by  Cynthia T. [Picasso]
    #3
    Good report and an important one. A great video David.

    My thoughts on this is to avoid AP as I just look for other sources for a story.
  • avatar Posted Jun 19, 2008 by  Can Tran (TFactor)
    #4
    This is my take on what the AP is doing.



    I also signed the petition.
  • Bill Enator Posted Jun 19, 2008 by  Bill Enator
    #5
    AP is trying to maintain or reattain the monopoly on the news in that they had from the 1930's-1990's.

    They aim to accomplish this: bu

    1: By strong-arming bloggers into accepting a definition of "Fair Use" that the AP themselves defines. This would likely be far less than what the law would allow. We've seen that AP considers four words to be "fair use".. i

    2: By asserting a "Hot News" misapproriation claim if bloggers should try to reporting on the same news that AP does.

    Very evil...and it's all about cash.. The AP seems desperate to remain relevant in what has become a communications revolution.

    We should support that sources that compete with the AP.. Reuters, All Headline News, Moreover, UPI and AFP.

    We have the power to cut AP and their members out of the picture.
  • avatar Posted Jun 20, 2008 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    #6
    Ah, to hell with them. If they're too damn stupid to see the writing on the wall, they're asking for this.

    iCopyright are the little jerks behind this. They're a company which actively promotes sale of materials like this. They claim hundreds of customers. It's like selling security alarms to suburbanites. Create a perceived threat, then sell your services.

    AP should get out more.

    This is called "monetization", which is geekspeak for justifying their own parasitic existence.
  • avatar Posted Jun 20, 2008 by  Nathalie C
    #7
    That is completely outrageous!
  • avatar Posted Jun 20, 2008 by  Michelle D. (PlanetJanet)
    #8
    why don't AP pay us - afterall, we are doing them a great service, we are bringing a wider audience to them - there is no such thing as bad publicity!
  • avatar Posted Jun 20, 2008 by  uninvitedwriter
    #9
    It's probably a reaction to the widespread copying I see on some other sites of newspaper and AP articles.

    However, I think it's silly that they want to charge for quoting them. As long as you quote the source I don't see what the problem is.

Add a Comment

You have to Login or Register to comment


Email:
Password:
Remember meForgot password?